People who watch movies or tv series a lot and who care about image quality? Couch gamers? I couldn’t get a decent 65“ monitor. But my TV has a very good image, supports 2160p with 144Hz, VRR, HDR, etc.
And at no point did my TV force me to go online. I can 100% just ignore the software. What more could I want?
Bruh 65" is only good if you’re like 6m away - almost no homes are like that. <=42" is the only normal size for a normal home, and sacrificing no quality. I get preferences, but that size has nothing to do with practicality
The optimal viewing distance of a 65“ TV is somewhere between 1.98m and 2.69m for it to fill out 30-40° of our field of vision, as recommended by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), for an immersive „cinematic“ watching experience.
My TV is about 2.5m away from my couch and I’m quite happy with the size, although, if price didn’t play a role, I‘d have gone with another size up (77“). Although I admit, it’s not the most practical size and it’s not for everyone. It does take up a lot of space.
However with 42“ you’re definitely sacrificing quality. Or at least I would be at the 2.5m distance I sit from my TV. The vast majority of people (me included) could not discern any difference between a FullHD and a UHD image there. Our eyes simply do not have that resolution (measured at up to 94 pixels per degree). Even my 65“ at the aforementioned 2.5m distance has a higher resolution than my eyes.
So >=65“ is the only normal size for a normal home, if one actually wants a home cinema and actually not sacrifice on quality, detail and immersion.
People who watch movies or tv series a lot and who care about image quality? Couch gamers? I couldn’t get a decent 65“ monitor. But my TV has a very good image, supports 2160p with 144Hz, VRR, HDR, etc.
And at no point did my TV force me to go online. I can 100% just ignore the software. What more could I want?
Bruh 65" is only good if you’re like 6m away - almost no homes are like that. <=42" is the only normal size for a normal home, and sacrificing no quality. I get preferences, but that size has nothing to do with practicality
The optimal viewing distance of a 65“ TV is somewhere between 1.98m and 2.69m for it to fill out 30-40° of our field of vision, as recommended by the Society of Motion Picture and Television Engineers (SMPTE), for an immersive „cinematic“ watching experience.
My TV is about 2.5m away from my couch and I’m quite happy with the size, although, if price didn’t play a role, I‘d have gone with another size up (77“). Although I admit, it’s not the most practical size and it’s not for everyone. It does take up a lot of space.
However with 42“ you’re definitely sacrificing quality. Or at least I would be at the 2.5m distance I sit from my TV. The vast majority of people (me included) could not discern any difference between a FullHD and a UHD image there. Our eyes simply do not have that resolution (measured at up to 94 pixels per degree). Even my 65“ at the aforementioned 2.5m distance has a higher resolution than my eyes.
So >=65“ is the only normal size for a normal home, if one actually wants a home cinema and actually not sacrifice on quality, detail and immersion.